Impure thoughts, or "Lame, you're no longer welcome in the r3volution."

[free.alive]

Like how the left seems to own the dialectic regarding social issues when it comes to public opinion, the chat-room ideologues, book-clubbers and starry-eyed third-party dreamers on here seem to own the moral debate regarding whether or not to vote for McCain this time around.

I'm not voting for McCain. I'm somewhere between my original position of writing in Ron Paul (whether he asked me to or not - so there! to the sycophants), voting for all other positions beside president, or voting for Baldwin. I'm not really thrilled about Baldwin, and I know my vote for Ron Paul won't be recorded or reported since he can't be an 'official write-in candidate' per our new, ridiculous 'top-two primary' election laws here in Washington State. However, it seems a little absurd to fail to commit to one or another candidate since I'm bothering to vote anyway because in Washington, freedom itself is backed up against the wall in this election.

That said, if it were close here in WA, I'd be voting for McCain with bells on.

Not because of (1) my supposed FEAR of Obama. Not because (2) there's anything redeeming about McCain - at all. Not because (3) McCain somehow ranks lower than Obama on the famed evil scale. Not because (4)I think the country will merely be a little better off, or some particular disaster avoided because The One, the communist (come on, let's name it when we see it), was prevented from attaining the office that many stupid Americans call Commander in Chief, or Ruler of the Free World, or President of the World, or merely some technocrat who'll 'run the economy.'

(2) I find nothing redeeming about McCain. Nothing.

(4) Obama will be worse than McCain - I think significantly - but this is not my central point.

(1) I do not FEAR certain things about Obama because of what many of you have reduced to mere GOP propaganda. I've looked at Obama objectively, critically and I think thoroughly enough. I'm a free, independent thinking person who is also not compelled toward a particular way of thinking because one or all of you say I'm not pure enough in my commitment to Liberty or some other load of bollocks.

(3) I fully understand the reason to reject all candidates who register on the evil index, and why one must, in fact, especially reject the ones who rank lower.

And here is the.....

But:

Obama -

If you've dug enough into his background to put all his associations together...
If you've watched the old documentary, Anarchy USA...
If you've read enough Cleaon Skousen...
If you've read enough Saul Alinsky...
If you've read enough Whittaker Chambers...
If you've read Douglas Hyde's 'Dedication and Leadership'...
If you've paid attention to Obama's relationship to Raila Odinga and dug into him...
If you are familiar with the subject material soon to be released by Bill Jasper of the New American regarding the links between New Left communists and Islamic fundamentalists/terrorists... (this being but an aside from the cumulative other points, but somewhat relevant)

...well then you realize that this nation may stand on a precipice it has never faced before.

The Communist Party USA had on their website a declaration that if you want Communism in America, to vote Democrat this election. This was pointed out to me not long after I heard that the CPUSA put out a press release in (I think) the NY Times saying that America was finally prepared for true socialism and that it was soon to come.

Whereas...

McCain -

His presidency may be the best case scenario in some twisted way of us gaining the upper hand in the GOP.

Now, I understand that many of you prefer to remain politically ineffectual in the most total way imagineable by eschewing any relationship with the GOP, let alone influencing and in many ways becoming its leadership. But I think most of you with this perspective merely populate these online forums, send out the flood of conspiracy emails that clog my inbox or are the people who no longer show up to the meetups. The rest of this contingent are too caught up in the anarchism vs. minarchism debate to even consider political action, or at least anything beyond the book club. I'm disappointed, but in the end I'll have to be ok with that.

Now whether or not the thought-police libertarians, Ron Paul sycophants, movement/unity anarchists, or puritanical pacifists on here think I'm not committed to Liberty, or I'm a McCain troll, or have 'defected' or some other nonsense is irrelevant to me, and here's why (don't 'banish' me from the Liberty Movement just yet):

Strategy. That's right.

My perspective, I feel, totally sidesteps all arguments that I've heard made regarding the moral consideration of my vote, which by the way I feel is the most irrelevant form of political action - barring protests. There is no moral choice in this election, because there are only two choices.

The third party candidates have no chance of winning. Worse than this, since the media is serving its true purpose - the state - extremely well this election, the third party candidates won't be able to fulfill their only valuable purpose, which is to cause pain to a major party candidate and influence either the major party's nomination choice, the policies of the nominee or the party in general.

In fact, on a moral level, since absolutely nothing is to be achieved beyond self congratulation by voting for any candidate besides the two-party candidates; and no strategy was combined en masse with calculated support for one of the majors, the third parties, their candidates and their supporters and voters actually ensured that the two evils could maximize their evil since the liberty movement proved to be a constituency that was not worth vying for. More accurately, we failed to actually become a constituency, which hopefully the C4L and our work in the GOP can change. Therefore, there is no, nor could ever be, any accountability on any libertarian position by either major candidate - and it's all our own fault.

Whoops!


Here are some threads which are a few among the several which have prompted me to start this one:

Why I've Changed My Mind -
Ron Paul supporter admits his change of heart and brings it to discussion only to be maligned and lampooned by those who know better.

Voting for McCain! -
Ire against defectors from the third-partyist camp grows; shout-downs commence, silencing is suggested, and banishment is discussed

Purity Tests and Assertions of Betrayal by RP's Supporters of RP Supporters -
I addressed topic of the silly insular rhetoric against those who aren't united in their anarchism and lock-step individualism, yet I must have done so in Chinese wearing a McCain shirt...

Why I'm Working My Ass Off for McCain
This person gets it! We have nothing in this race, but we can use it to our advantage. We night have been able to use it much more effectively if we had persuaded 80% of our people to stay involved instead of heading back to the chat rooms and to third party purgatory.

So. Are you patriots ready to be blamed for McInsane's loss? -
The idea that we can take credit for taking McCain down is played with here, and eventually it's admitted that we can't. This would've been the most preferable option aside from us dragging McCain to victory and then working with conservatives and paleos to chain him down. However, we fucked this up by our newness to politics and parties as a movement, our stubborness, and our lack of balls as a group.

Understand that it takes balls on an individual level to work hard for local Republicans yet vocally swear your opposition and refusal to vote for McCain. Instead, only a few of us remained and we're stuck having to do his GOTV calls so their PCO's can elect us as secretaries, chairs, treasurers and district leaders. Most of you fucked us in that sense. Thanks.

You see, I'm in no way married to this idea of supporting McCain, even though I am concerned that the Obama-nation may be more of a deadly pestilence to Liberty than a seasonal nuisance. We need to do what is best for the long-term. That requres strategy, and strategy can often be confusing, ugly and at times feel dirty. But just imagine the message we'd send and the power we'd command if a full 50% of active Republican volunteers supported their local state and congressional candidates (who voted against the bail-out) but openly refused to vote or campaign for McCain, in a united fashion. Wow!

Republican Party in total Chaos/Free-fall -
The discussion over the GOP's decline shows our general perspective is that we can more easily take over an anemic Republican Party. However, the contrast between commanding a weak organization and commanding a strong one is never really explored. The greatest political prize would be taking over a strong, or better yet rising organization.


But what of the two major candidates?

 

[free.alive]

Danger! - Obama Presidency vs. McCain Presidency

Negatives:


Obama -

Life-long Marxist(-Leninist?) with a totalitarian state based on "reparatory redistribution" as his political raison d'etre

Has designed his career for the specific purpose of overturning the Constitution, which he understands as a negative document designed to restrict Federal power, in order to create a socialist state.

Seems to support fascist policies as intermediary solutions en route to his ultimate goal

Is part of an effort larger than himself to "fundamentally transform" America.

Would rest atop an aggressive far-left Democrat-controlled Federal government

Three SCOTUS' could retire before the 2010 mid-terms so as to assure the passage of three new state-uber-alles type judges to the court

Would be powerful enough to force through the passage of a New New Deal

Would expand war as much as his opponent

Given the communist tactics he's well steeped in, any redeemable position a libertarian could find in him is likely to be retracted once he comes to power

Has already exhibited an enthusiasm for attacking or silencing political opponents and would likely usher in new restrictions on political speech, such as the new incarnation of the fairness doctrine which his party is already pining for, which would likely require some form of regulation of internet blogs, etc., thereby giving justification for the implementation for the supposed "i-patriot act" currently gathering dust on the shelf of some bureaucrat

The media may have never been so in-the-tank for a politician

McCain -

Quasi-socialist populist with a commitment to the state in all areas

Is frighteningly evocative of militarism in his conception of 'service'

Is not just a supporter, but an advocate of fascist economic policies

Has no underlying philosophy regarding the role of government or economics

Would expand war as much as his opponent

Is very much surrounded by neocons

His elections runs the risk of emboldening neocons, or at least prevents their being discredited and banished

His support for war and fascism runs the risk of keeping those of us with the mettle to try to advocate Liberty within the GOP marginalized on the issues of fascist economic policies, police state and foreign intervention, etc.

His failed policies could prevent what may otherwise be a repeat of 1994 in 2010, in which the difference would this time be that those incoming Republicans could be dominated by liberty candidates if we've worked hard and been effective.

Is seen very favorably by the media, for a Republican

Positives:


Obama -

Could, if he hasn't restricted our online organizational tools, assist in galvanizing our movement by his failed policies alone.

Could cause our arguments of non-interventionism, individual liberty, opposition to the police state, and a commitment to the free-market to resonate with the wider GOP and accelerate the spread of our ideas among the greater right

His failed and disastrous economic policies would all but guarantee a repeat of 1994 in 2010, in which the difference would this time be that those incoming Republicans could be dominated by liberty candidates if we've worked hard and been effective.

His likely totalitarian policies and continuation of foreign and domestic militarism would alienate much of the left-wing of his own party, providing us with a naturally-friendly constituency against status-quo dems and repubs

That's pretty much it - all positives because of devastating negatives

McCain -

If we can control his party, or even a large enough contingent within it, we could greatly influence his policies, definitely that of the governors and congressional Republicans. Remember, Bush never really experience much dissent within his own party until the Amnesty bill, while McCain is starting out loathed by probably half of the Republicans who will still pull the lever for him.

Since he does hold some token free-market positions, he will likely damage our economy less than Obama. If we can be forceful enough with the congressional Republicans, we may tie his hands to free-market policies, at least creating gridlock between him and the Democrat majorithy in the Congress

While it would be more difficult to get some aspects of our message to resonate with the existing party leadership and some of the rank & file, the party, by winning this election, will hasten the rebuilding phase which has already begun, and if we succeed in being the largest unified bloc withing the party, we'll be able to characterize and lead much of that growth. This could potentially be the most positive scenario, thereby defeating soundly the idea that only an Obama win can propel our movement within the GOP.

Those of us who have played ball to gain cred for re-org meetings where party leadership is chosen will be even more persuasive to the voting pco's when we're running for leadership positions.

McCain is not a committed, life-long Marxist(-Leninist?) like Obama. 'Nuff said about that one.

That McCain won the nomination has revived conservative opposition outside of our movement (many paleos, many Christain right-wingers, etc.) and we'll be able to easily form a sort of unspoken, or even actual alliance with them within the party. It all depends on how fast we has a movement mature and how savvy we become.

 

[Conza88]

Tbh, I think you really wasted your time with this.. lol

 

[free.alive]

maybe

 

[Real_CaGeD]

A Republican party will be dead after a McCain presidency.

 

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Jeez, who cares about this Communist Party endorsement? It's nothing new for the Democrats! The Communist Party USA has always endorsed the Democrat since the 1980s! Too bad more people don't seem to realize this, and are falling for retarded GOP fearmongering to whip conservatives back into line for loser McCain who is already screwed anyway.

 

[newbitech]

maybe

I appreciate your commentary and insight and agree with you on much of what you have said. I don't have time for more detailed comments.

I'm going to go ahead and vote for Baldwin for the simple fact that its follow through. In baseball, bowling, basketball, and probably many other things, the first thing you learn is follow through. Even if you miss, you should practice good form. Something like that.

This version of the revolution seemed forced, not spontaneous, and certainly not followed through with the same passion as it began. It was a flash in the pan. We will need more pain before we all congeal as a movement.

Many outstanding individual efforts, but politics is a team sport.

 

[moostraks]

I appreciate your commentary and insight and agree with you on much of what you have said. I don't have time for more detailed comments.

I'm going to go ahead and vote for Baldwin for the simple fact that its follow through. In baseball, bowling, basketball, and probably many other things, the first thing you learn is follow through. Even if you miss, you should practice good form. Something like that.

This version of the revolution seemed forced, not spontaneous, and certainly not followed through with the same passion as it began. It was a flash in the pan. We will need more pain before we all congeal as a movement.

Many outstanding individual efforts, but politics is a team sport.

You know this is probably better than any analogy I have heard so far. It matters not what we achieve as much that we follow through with commitment to break the cycle this time,imho.

Your assessment is right on the need more pain issue. It will take that before an outstanding leader can be accepted by the majority of those left carrying on here. We need to get past the party politics, be it constitution, republican, democrat, libertarian, etc... and focus on the goal. Too many get wrapped up in title and party goals. That is how they got is mired down in the front-runner trash they offer up.

Best wishes to all as we muck through this cycle. I just pray people will vote for a purpose other than fear of the alternatives. It is better to vote your conscience, even if it is for a mainstream party, than to vote because you fear the alternative. That is when you have lost your soul....

 

[Spirit of '76]

I think the biggest flaw in your argument is that you assume it would even be remotely possible for us to wrest control away from the neocon contingent in the event of a McCain victory. I argue that this is just a pipedream.

If McCain wins -- even if he won with the active collaboration of some of us -- the official Party Line would be that he won in spite of us, not because we are a powerful constituency to which the GOP must kowtow in the future.

The neocon pundits and, by extension, the rank and file Republicans would view a McCain victory as a vindication of their ideas. They would say that they won a mandate from the American people despite our pleas for "isolationism", "pacifism", and "archaic economic notions".

I see much more possibility for us to influence the party moving forward if McCain loses. Sure, it would be much more satisfying to take over a strong party than a weak one; however, it's also infinitely more difficult.

Now obviously if we want to rise to prominence in the party after McCain's defeat, we can't seem to be self-congratulatory, celebratory, or gleeful over Obama's victory. After all, an Obama victory will not be good for us overall. No, we must admit that Obama's victory is generally a bad thing, but we must also constitently and reasonably point out to the GOP that if they had not rejected us, we would have had a much stronger chance of defeating Obama in the first place. We must put forth a cogent, balanced argument showing that the GOP lost 2008 because they rejected their base principles, moved left (as evident in the nomination of Senator McCain-Feingold-Kennedy-Kyl) in a lame attempt to compete with the Dems on their own ground, and totally alienated a hardcore 10% of their own party that opposes the welfare-warfare state.

Besides, after the way we delegates to the RNC were treated by McCain's thugs (hell, they confiscated our flag because it had the word "Liberty" on it), there's no way I could ever in good conscience cast a vote for McCain. To do so would be to cast a vote for fascism.

 

[CUnknown]

By definition, you are not assisting the Revolution if you vote for either McCain or Obama. The corporate candidates are the status quo. Supporting them is a status-quo preserving act, not a Revolutionary act. We should try to be tolerant and invite people in, but that mostly applies to people who haven't really heard the message yet. If you've followed the Ron Paul campaign, if you've heard the message, if it has excited you, and then you turn around and vote for the status quo, why should you still be considered a part of the Revolution?

That would be like if Patrick Henry, after shouting "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!", turned around and decided to support King George after all, because maybe he's probably better than other Kings that could reign over us.

Does that make sense to you?

You must choose whether you support the Revolution or the status quo. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Time for Change]

By definition, you are not assisting the Revolution if you vote for either McCain or Obama. The corporate candidates are the status quo. Supporting them is a status-quo preserving act, not a Revolutionary act. We should try to be tolerant and invite people in, but that mostly applies to people who haven't really heard the message yet. If you've followed the Ron Paul campaign, if you've heard the message, if it has excited you, and then you turn around and vote for the status quo, why should you still be considered a part of the Revolution?

That would be like if Patrick Henry, after shouting "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!", turned around and decided to support King George after all, because maybe he's probably better than other Kings that could reign over us.

Does that make sense to you?

You must choose whether you support the Revolution or the status quo. You can't have it both ways.

Here's the head banging against the wall question...

What message is sent by all the Revolution supporters spreading their support across the totals of 3 alternative party candidates, each with minimal percentages that, being so small, will likely go unreported?
That is the problem I see.

These republicrat party members live and pretend to think by what the television tells them to think.
If the television stations decide that 5% to each of 3 candidates is unreportable, and does not report that set of totals...does that send an effective message?

If the movement can unify behind a single candidate they can be effective.

I see a splintered base arguing over which third party candidate is the best, why everyone should abandon the other and see the overall continued marginalization of the voice of the movement.
That makes me cringe and feel significant dread.
That leads to my mindset of damage control rather than "Send a message voting"
That thought makes me sick, and if I voice that damage control opinion, gets me flamed and potentially ostracized from the community.

I am damned if I do and damned if I don't here...but I refuse to give up regardless of what happens during this cycle.

The campaign to locate, promote, support and elect liberty candidates does NOT end with the finalization of this joke of an election cycle.

THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING and I REFUSE to quit.

 

[MelissaCato]

By definition, you are not assisting the Revolution if you vote for either McCain or Obama. The corporate candidates are the status quo. Supporting them is a status-quo preserving act, not a Revolutionary act. We should try to be tolerant and invite people in, but that mostly applies to people who haven't really heard the message yet. If you've followed the Ron Paul campaign, if you've heard the message, if it has excited you, and then you turn around and vote for the status quo, why should you still be considered a part of the Revolution?

That would be like if Patrick Henry, after shouting "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!", turned around and decided to support King George after all, because maybe he's probably better than other Kings that could reign over us.

Does that make sense to you?

You must choose whether you support the Revolution or the status quo. You can't have it both ways.

Good Post.

My vote is Baldwin. Period. Write in. Pa counts write in .. so that is my story.

McCain needs to win Pennsylvania to win the Election. .. if you Ron Paul supporters can't get your acts together to flip this entire election as planned well .. your traitors as I see it. We can do this ... especially the Key Stone State.

Ron Paul said himself 3rd parties are the majority ... if we all vote for Baldwin .. whaaalaaaaa ... done flipped and the bastards will be outta there soon enough .... but I'm afraid we are too stupid.

.. but I hope you idiots at least know who is the "little of 2 evils" ... but I doubt that too.

Did anyone figure out what Colin Powell's crisis ment for January 21 or 22 of 2009 ?

.... do the right thing people ... unite. It's simple. If Colin Powell predicts a crisis on a certain date ... you be damn sure Obama and McCain know about it too.

Don't be the comedy hour of this country ... do the right thing. The world is watching us. We have friends and we have enemies ... but most of all we have a Republic not yet tarnished to the point of non-existent. The USSR is now non-existent.

Just a thought.

 

[mrkurtz]

(1) I do not FEAR certain things about Obama because of what many of you have reduced to mere GOP propaganda. I've looked at Obama objectively, critically and I think thoroughly enough. I'm a free, independent thinking person who is also not compelled toward a particular way of thinking because one or all of you say I'm not pure enough in my commitment to Liberty or some other load of bollocks.

Here was your #1 premise... then you back it up with...

If you are familiar with the subject material soon to be released by Bill Jasper of the New American regarding the links between New Left communists and Islamic fundamentalists/terrorists... (this being but an aside from the cumulative other points, but somewhat relevant)

...well then you realize that this nation may stand on a precipice it has never faced before.

The Communist Party USA had on their website a declaration that if you want Communism in America, to vote Democrat this election. This was pointed out to me not long after I heard that the CPUSA put out a press release in (I think) the NY Times saying that America was finally prepared for true socialism and that it was soon to come.

Given your premise in (1), you are being gripped by fear created by the GOP propaganda machine. And this has altered your ability to look at this issue objectively. Recall, guilt by association is not a sustainable argument; and Bill Jasper is a well known drummer for the neo-conservative movement.

You are basically asking yourself to give up tenets of freedom because you "fear the boogeyman". Fear has a nasty way of perverting otherwise logical trains of thoughts to accept compromises on your unalienable rights. That is how people have power over you... it's with fear.

 

[torchbearer]

I think the biggest flaw in your argument is that you assume it would even be remotely possible for us to wrest control away from the neocon contingent in the event of a McCain victory. I argue that this is just a pipedream.

If McCain wins -- even if he won with the active collaboration of some of us -- the official Party Line would be that he won in spite of us, not because we are a powerful constituency to which the GOP must kowtow in the future.

The neocon pundits and, by extension, the rank and file Republicans would view a McCain victory as a vindication of their ideas. They would say that they won a mandate from the American people despite our pleas for "isolationism", "pacifism", and "archaic economic notions".

I see much more possibility for us to influence the party moving forward if McCain loses. Sure, it would be much more satisfying to take over a strong party than a weak one; however, it's also infinitely more difficult.

Now obviously if we want to rise to prominence in the party after McCain's defeat, we can't seem to be self-congratulatory, celebratory, or gleeful over Obama's victory. After all, an Obama victory will not be good for us overall. No, we must admit that Obama's victory is generally a bad thing, but we must also constitently and reasonably point out to the GOP that if they had not rejected us, we would have had a much stronger chance of defeating Obama in the first place. We must put forth a cogent, balanced argument showing that the GOP lost 2008 because they rejected their base principles, moved left (as evident in the nomination of Senator McCain-Feingold-Kennedy-Kyl) in a lame attempt to compete with the Dems on their own ground, and totally alienated a hardcore 10% of their own party that opposes the welfare-warfare state.

Besides, after the way we delegates to the RNC were treated by McCain's thugs (hell, they confiscated our flag because it had the word "Liberty" on it), there's no way I could ever in good conscience cast a vote for McCain. To do so would be to cast a vote for fascism.

+1

 

[-lotus-]

I think the biggest flaw in your argument is that you assume it would even be remotely possible for us to wrest control away from the neocon contingent in the event of a McCain victory. I argue that this is just a pipedream.

If McCain wins -- even if he won with the active collaboration of some of us -- the official Party Line would be that he won in spite of us, not because we are a powerful constituency to which the GOP must kowtow in the future.

The neocon pundits and, by extension, the rank and file Republicans would view a McCain victory as a vindication of their ideas. They would say that they won a mandate from the American people despite our pleas for "isolationism", "pacifism", and "archaic economic notions".

I see much more possibility for us to influence the party moving forward if McCain loses. Sure, it would be much more satisfying to take over a strong party than a weak one; however, it's also infinitely more difficult.

Now obviously if we want to rise to prominence in the party after McCain's defeat, we can't seem to be self-congratulatory, celebratory, or gleeful over Obama's victory. After all, an Obama victory will not be good for us overall. No, we must admit that Obama's victory is generally a bad thing, but we must also constitently and reasonably point out to the GOP that if they had not rejected us, we would have had a much stronger chance of defeating Obama in the first place. We must put forth a cogent, balanced argument showing that the GOP lost 2008 because they rejected their base principles, moved left (as evident in the nomination of Senator McCain-Feingold-Kennedy-Kyl) in a lame attempt to compete with the Dems on their own ground, and totally alienated a hardcore 10% of their own party that opposes the welfare-warfare state.

Besides, after the way we delegates to the RNC were treated by McCain's thugs (hell, they confiscated our flag because it had the word "Liberty" on it), there's no way I could ever in good conscience cast a vote for McCain. To do so would be to cast a vote for fascism.

I really like this post. perhaps we should draft a letter, stating our movement's position as lamentable, in the event of a obama win, but also as a position of solidarity that if we had been listened to instead of ignored we could have worked with the GOP to bring home a win. Instead we were disenfranchised and the party fractured. Sign them, date them after the election date and send them in to GOP headquarters. that might send them a message. Put the letters on special CFL letterhead. any thoughts?

 

[spudea]

"the party, by winning this election, will hasten the rebuilding phase which has already begun, and if we succeed in being the largest unified bloc withing the party, we'll be able to characterize and lead much of that growth."

i have to disagree with this statement. The neo-cons (and all George W. Bush lovers) systematically decimated our efforts to build support for Ron Paul and other RP candidates. They have their own agenda for destorying america that does not include any of us. McCain will expand on the neo-facist, big corporate favoritism of the past 8 years that has destroyed the middle class. At least Obama has vowed to start dismanteling this facist system. My one hope is that his more severe communist proposals do not pass the congress.

Only by punishing the GOP, can we reveal the disaster that is the Neo-Con polices. My hope is that in 4 years, we'll be completely out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and America will be ready for the truth as laid out by Ron Paul.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Now, I understand that many of you prefer to remain politically ineffectual in the most total way imagineable by eschewing any relationship with the GOP

I don't maintain "relationships" with people or organizations that, figuratively, kick me in the nuts, stab me in the back, spit in my eye and call me a motherfucker as their hired goons throw me out the door.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I don't maintain "relationships" with people or organizations that, figuratively, kick me in the nuts, stab me in the back, spit in my eye and call me a motherfucker as their hired goons throw me out the door.

No, you overthrow the power brokers. Which is what we're going to do. But, to do that, it's going to work better if we play chess, rather than dodgeball.

 

[Anti Federalist]

No, you overthrow the power brokers. Which is what we're going to do. But, to do that, it's going to work better if we play chess, rather than dodgeball.

Good luck with that.

Just keep in mind, that is what people who supported the man in your avatar said they would do over 40 years ago.

We see how well that worked out.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Good luck with that.

Just keep in mind, that is what people who supported the man in your avatar said they would do over 40 years ago.

We see how well that worked out.

Ok, I'll do that. THEY WON THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION. Yeah, they lost the general. But, in the process they changed a large number of hearts and minds. It was Goldwater's platform that Reagan ran on. Too bad he didn't DO the things he said.

Tell me, how far do you figure throwing in the towel will getcha? If you want to really piss off the people who snubbed us, TAKE OVER THEIR PARTY. And now is the time to do it. They can't keep us out now --- they are totally decimated. I also think you'll be surprised at how many people will join us. Ron's platform is right in line with traditional conservatism. It was only his stance on the war that scared them.